Thursday, December 23, 2010

COUNCILMAN RESPONDS: To Missourian and "Dirty Little Secrets" stories

COLUMBIA, 12/23/10 (Beat Byte) -- I've
been slow to the switch on local affairs of late, and didn't want to let
Councilman Jason Thornhill's detailed response to yesterday's Columbia Heart
Beat story about Ken Midkiff, David Shorr, and the EPA sit past the
holidays. The Heart Beat story quotes a Monday Columbia Missourian
story, that in turn quoted Mr. Thornhill, a local real estate agent with
Weichert Realtors. Links to both articles are included below.

I'll stop short of saying I was misquoted by the [Columbia Missourian]
reporter, but I would like to make it clear that the actual sentence quoted in
the article was part of a much larger conversation with context
that was not explained.

As we talked, I
told the reporter that in my opinion, the council
cannot (and frankly shouldn't in many areas)
micro-manage and attempt to become experts in fields or on
subjects where it just is not possible to do so -- TMDL's, storm water, and
pollutants included.

I am a college graduate and feel I have a reasonable level of
intelligence; but am eventually overwhelmed by the minutiae that is the whole
Hinkson Creek/TMDL/EPA/stormwater/pollutant issue. The city frequently utilizes
professionals for this sort of thing; from LEED-certified building design to
civil litigation to contract negotiations and the like.

Are we (the council) to be expected to be so well-versed in all of these
subjects that we become experts at them?

I don't think that's possible, and my interpretation of the charter doesn't
lead me to believe I am wrong. The manager and clerk serve at the pleasure of
the council, and to that end we request all information from staff as
required or requested as it may be, to set policy and ordinances
accordingly.

At the tail end of the Missourian article, I am quoted as saying,
"the city can seek out professionals to do this job."

This statement was intended to mean we (the council) expect staff to either
be experts, or to work with them (consultants and the like) to gather the
necessary information for us to make educated decisions. Representing the
citizens appropriately can only be done using good information to make sound
decisions. Should we feel that we are not being provided with that good
information, then we need to address that issue with our city manager.

We are frequently provided with reports, findings, studies, surveys etc.
that are used in one way or another, but may or may not be the subject of an
actual council meeting or work session. To be able to put all of that
information into an official meeting format for public consumption would be
massively time-consuming; more so than what is already undertaken by council and
staff. Therefore it is necessary for us to study these things individually, on
our own time.

I, for one, earn my living based almost entirely upon the fact that
Columbia is a great place to work and live. An impaired
Hinkson creek does nothing to accentuate the best parts of Columbia. It hurts.
I think all of us would agree that a clean Hinkson is not only
preferred, but necessary.

But it is also incumbent upon us, as council members, to
determine just exactly what is impairing that waterway before
we decide to implement ways to correct a problem not clearly identified. Much
of the information that I've seen does not indicate just what it is that is
polluting the creek.

Could it be something from further north, outside of the city limits making
its way through Columbia? Can it be so simple as to say it is excess storm
water? I don't think we have a definitive answer. Has the fact that the city,
over the past few years, eliminated millions of gallons of
effluent from old, defective sewage systems and lagoons eventually
making their way to the Hinkson, not had a positive effect on
the pollutant levels?

What if we spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to build retention
basins and remove housing and people from the creek borders and test again, only
to find that the pollutant levels have not decreased?

What level of incompetence and irresponsibility will we be accused of at
that point?